Search results

Showing 1 – 4 of 4 results.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Estimating Human Trafficking into the United States [Phase I: Development of a Methodology] (ICPSR 20422)

Released/updated on: 2015-02-19

Geographic coverage: Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, El Salvador, United States, Guatemala, Mexico, Peru, Global

This research project developed and fully documented a method to estimate the number of females and males trafficked for the purposes of sexual and labor exploitation from eight countries (Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, and Venezuela) into the United States at the Southwest border. The model utilizes only open source data. This research represents the first phase of a two-phase project and

Provides a conceptual framework for identifying potential data sources to estimate the number of victims at different stages in trafficking
Develops statistical models to estimate the number of males and females at risk of being trafficked for sexual and labor exploitation from the eight countries, and the number of males and females actually trafficked for sex and labor
Incorporates into the estimation models the transit journey of trafficking victims from the eight countries to the southwest border of the United States
Designs the estimation models such that they are highly flexible and modular so that they can evolve as the body of data expands
Utilizes open source data as inputs to the statistical model, making the model accessible to anyone interested in using it
Presents preliminary estimates that illustrate the use of the statistical methods
Illuminates gaps in data sources.

The data included in this collection are the open source data which were primarily used in the models to estimate the number of males and females at risk of being trafficked.

Curated

Federally Prosecuted Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC) Cases, United States, 1998-2005 (ICPSR 26722)

Released/updated on: 2019-10-29

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1998-01-01--2005-01-01

To increase understanding of the prosecution of Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children and Youth (CSEC) offenders, the Urban Institute, a non-partisan social and economic policy research organization, along with Polaris Project, an anti-human trafficking organization based in the United States and Japan, were awarded a cooperative agreement from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to conduct a 12-month study on CSEC in the United States. The purpose of this research was to conduct a national analysis of federal prosecutions of CSEC-related cases from 1998 through 2005, in order to answer the following four research questions:

Is the United States enforcing existing federal laws related to CSEC?
What are key features of successfully prosecuted CSEC cases? What factors predict convictions in cases? What factors predict sentence length?
Have the U.S. courts increased penalties associated with sexual crimes against children?
What, if any, are the effects of CSEC legislation on service providers who work with these victims?

The data collection includes three datasets: (Dataset 1) Base Cohort File with 7,696 cases for 50 variables, (Dataset 2) Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC) Defendants in cases filed in U.S. Court with 7,696 cases for 100 variables, and (Dataset 3) Suspects in Criminal Matters Investigated and Concluded by U.S. Attorneys Dataset with 13,819 cases for 14 variables.

Curated

Law Enforcement Response to Human Trafficking and the Implications for Victims in the United States, 2005 (ICPSR 20423)

Released/updated on: 2011-06-13

Geographic coverage: North Carolina, New York, District of Columbia, Indiana, United States, Maine, Hawaii, Minnesota, California, Alabama, Florida, New Jersey, Washington, New Mexico, Illinois, Texas, Colorado, Connecticut, Missouri, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Arizona, Nevada

Time period: 2005-08-01--2005-11-01, 2000-01-01--2005-01-01

The purpose of the study was to explore how local law enforcement were responding to the crime of human trafficking after the passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) in 2000. The first phase of the study (Part 1, Law Enforcement Interview Quantitative Data) involved conducting telephone surveys with 121 federal, state, and local law enforcement officials in key cities across the country between August and November of 2005. Different versions of the telephone survey were created for the key categories of law enforcement targeted by this study (state/local investigators, police offices, victim witness coordinators, and federal agents). The telephone surveys were supplemented with interviews from law enforcement supervisors/managers, representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Human Trafficking/Smuggling Office, the United States Attorney's Office, the Trafficking in Persons Office, and the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division. Respondents were asked about their history of working human trafficking cases, knowledge of human trafficking, and familiarity with the TVPA. Other variables include the type of trafficking victims encountered, how human trafficking cases were identified, and the law enforcement agency's capability to address the issue of trafficking. The respondents were also asked about the challenges and barriers to investigating human trafficking cases and to providing services to the victims. In the second phase of the study (Part 2, Case File Review Qualitative Data) researchers collected comprehensive case information from sources such as case reports, sanitized court reports, legal newspapers, magazines, and newsletters, as well as law review articles. This case review examined nine prosecuted cases of human trafficking since the passage of the TVPA. The research team conducted an assessment of each case focusing on four core components: identifying the facts, defining the problem, identifying the rule to the facts (e.g., in light of the rule, how law enforcement approached the situation), and conclusion.

Curated

Restricted

New York City Trafficking Assessment Project, 2007-2008 (ICPSR 31601)

Released/updated on: 2011-07-06

Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)

Time period: 2007-05-01--2007-06-01, 2007-10-01--2007-11-01, 2007-11-01--2007-12-01, 2008-01-01--2008-02-01

The purpose of the New York City Trafficking Assessment Project (NYCTAP) was to develop a screening tool to identify likely victims of trafficking and an accompanying toolkit for service providers to support the administration of the screening tool. The NYCTAP Community Advisory Board (CAB) consisted of twelve local organizations, including four social service agencies, four legal service agencies, three community-based organizations, and one advocacy organization. In May and June of 2007, (Part 1, Community Advisory Board (CAB) Agency Reviews Qualitative Data) a draft of the screening tool was circulated among the CAB agencies for review. The reviewers were asked to evaluate the screening tool for comprehensiveness, section organization, question wording, and question placement. The draft NYCTAP screening tool was also circulated among law enforcement agencies at the federal and local level in November and December of 2007. Reviewers (Part 3, Law Enforcement Agency Reviews Qualitative Data) were asked to review the screening tool from the perspective of federal and local law enforcement and to suggest modifications and additions to screening tool content. In October and November of 2007, semi-structured interviews (Part 2, Community Advisory Board (CAB) Agency Interviews Qualitative Data) were conducted with two CAB agencies that were unable to participate in the field application of the screening tool, but had extensive experience in trafficking victim assistance that could be shared. In January and February of 2008, (Part 4, Community Advisory Board (CAB) De-briefings Qualitative Data) six of participating CAB agencies that applied the draft NYCTAP screening tool in their work with clients were asked to provide feedback on the overall usability of the screening tool, as well as tool content and tool administration.